G2RGrup Recerca Remugants

G2RGrup Recerca Remugants

Erasmus Mundus M.Sc. ‘Food of Life’Summer School

UAB, Bellaterra (Spain), 12-18 August of 2014

Animal Production Systems:Aims & Scenario

Gerardo Caja gerardo.caja@uab.es

The fates of human societies (Diamond, 1997)

The Yali’s question: ‘Why is that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?’The Inca’s empire defeat at Cajamarca (Peru) in 1532: ‘How did Pizarro (168 soldiers) come to be at Cajamarca?. Why didn’t Atahuallpa (about 80,000 soldiers) instead try to conquer Spain?’

Jared Diamond: Ornithologist, physiologist, evolutionary biologist, biogeographer, Prof. of UCLA, Los Angeles, CA (USA)

> 1,000,000 books sold

How societies choose to fail or succeed (Diamond, 2005)

A comparative method based on 12 key points to evaluate sustainability:● Preservation of natural habitats● Use of ‘wild foods’● Maintaining biodiversity● Soil erosion● Use of energy sources● Use of freshwater● Sunlight supply (infinite?)● Release of toxic chemicals● Impact of ‘alien’ species● Greenhouse gas production ● Growth of human population● People impact on the environment

Spread of humans around the world (Diamond, 1997)

7,000,000 BC

500,000 BC

40,000 BC10,000 BC

11,000 BC

12,000 BC

20,000 BC

1,000 AD

500 AD

700 AD 700 AD

1,000 AD

980 AD

Why main plant & animal domestication did not happen in Africa?

The human journey:Dispersement effect

Hot question:

World location of food production centers (Diamond, 2004)

Centers of origin of food production (based on Diamond, 2004)

Food resource

Continents

Eurasia Central & Eastasia

Africa N & SAmerica

Oceania

Plants WheatBarley

PeaOliveOat

RiceMillet

EggplantSesame

SorghumYams

Oil palmCoffee

Sycamore fig

CornBeans

SquashPotatoManioc

Sunflower

Sugar cane

Banana

Animals Sheep GoatCattleHorse

PigHumped

cattleCamel

Guinea fowl

Donkey

TurkeyLlama

Guinea pig

None

‘Large species candidates for domestication’ (based on Diamond, 2004)

Candidates1

Continents

TotalEurasia Africa America Australia

Potential

Domesticated

72

13

51

0

24

1

1

0

148

14

Percentage 18% 0% 4% 0% 10%1Animal species > 45 kg BW

Reasons & consequences of domestication (based on Diamond, 2004)

● Autocatalytic process● Induced simultaneously by the end of Ice Age during

Pleistocene● Easily extended in the same latitude (horizontal axis)● Livestock (~10,000 yr) earlier than plants (~8,500 yr)● Allowed by depletion of availability of wild species● Selection of species for ‘easibility’ ● Alternative purposes for the same specie (breeds)● Few species domesticated:

– Large animals: 14/148 (10%)– Higher plants: 100/200,000 (0.05%)

● Allowed sedentary and crowd living styles● Introduced ‘crowd diseases’

World development axis: ‘Horizontal vs. Vertical’ (Diamond, 2004)

Easibility

Domestication morphology changes & easability(Diamond, 2004)

Size & BW reduction, female or juvenile shapes & colors!!

‘Pharming’: ‘Animal GMO’ are already started… (2006)

rhAT: recombinant humane ‘Anti-trombine’Deficiency of ATIII produce thrombosis (80% deficiency risk at 60 yr of age)1 goat/lactation = 90.000 human blood donors(GTC biotherapeutics, USA)

Human requirements & food resources evolution (Based in: Sauvant, 1990)

Rural society Industrial

Food quantityFood quality

Food safety & traceability

Modern

Dev

elop

men

t ind

ex

XV XVIII XX XXITime

Hunger crisis & migrations

BSE crisis

Sustenance

World war II

World war I

New lands

Bird flu crisisPig (A) flu crisis

Sustainability & biodiversity

Thomas Malthus (1798):English economist and demographer. Considered one of the 10 economists that changed the world vision.Statement:‘Population growth proceeds exponentially (extra people added also themselves reproduce), while food production increases only arithmetically’

The ‘Malthusian theory’ revisited

Mathematics or religion conflict?:● Valid under isolated conditions: ‘Collapse’● Altered by introducing ‘alien’ foods● Regulated by population control● Sustainable growth?

Human population today (>7,000 Millions!)

Canadian genetist and ecologist. Awarded with the Right Livelihood Award (Suecia, 2009). Author of “The legacy”: ● “Why is growth an end in itself?” ●“How can growth and consumption be aims?” ●“Exponential growth is simply a way to suicide”.

The ‘lab tube theory’

Life in the Earth is like the growth of bacteria in a lab tube able to divide each minute. We are at minute 59th…

The ‘lab tube theory’(1/3): Starting

0 min = 1, 1 min = 2, 2 min = 22,… 59 min = 50%, 60 min = 100%

. . . .

55 min = 3.125%, 58 min = 25%, 59 min = 50%, 60 min = 100%

. . . . .Are we too fast?

No! We still have more than 76%

Are we too fast?

No! There is still50%

# !

The ‘lab tube theory’(2/3): Growing

59 min = 50% I + D + i = ×4 62 min = 400%

The ‘lab tube theory’(3/3): Collapsing

The World scenario: Commodities(FAOStat, 2013)

The World scenario (Wint et al., 2003): Land unsuitable for ruminants or crops

The World scenario (Wint et al., 2005): Land unsuitable for monogastrics

The World livestock population (FAOSTAT, 2013):

Specie Population (× 106) Human/animal ratio

Humans 7,000 1.0 Cattle 1,426 4.8Water buffalo 195 37.5

Sheep 1,094 6.1Goats 924 8.2

Pigs 967 6.8

Horses 59 117.3Donkeys 43 161.3Mules 11 496.2

Camels 19 339.5

Poultry 20,708 0.4Rabbits 0.89 403,187.5

Legend

Map prepared by LEAD - FAO, 2002

Livestock, Environment And Development Initiative

Global Livestock Densities: 1. Cattle

cattle/km2

Legend

Global Livestock Densities: 2. Small Ruminants

Map prepared by LEAD - FAO, 2002

Livestock, Environment And Development Initiative

sheep & goat/km2

Legend

Map prepared by LEAD - FAO, 2002

Livestock, Environment And Development Initiative

Global Livestock Densities: 3. Pigs

pigs/km2

Legend

Map prepared by LEAD - FAO, 2002

Livestock, Environment And Development Initiative

Global Livestock Densities: 4. Poultry

poultry/km2

World feed production per capita (Gill, 2007)

Plateau (97 kg/person)

World manufactured feed per livestock To which species? (Gill, 2007)

Beef cattle (6%)

Other (3%)

Poultry (40%)

Pigs (32%)

Aquaculture (4%)

Dairy cattle (16%)

World (2006) = 635 Mt/yr

No growing in tonnage Faster growing in tonnage

88%

Who is using the resources?: Top 10 countries in industrial feed production (Gill, 2007)

World (2006) = 635 Mt/yr

The World livestock scenario: Meat & Milk supply by country

Animal foods are mainly produced & consumed in the more developed countries.

Meat Milk

Human evolution & Food supply: 1/2

Diet varied during human evolution: Less fiber More carbohydrates More protein More fat Higher n-6/n-3 FA

Sedentary habits Incorrect diet

Future? > 20% obesity > 30% cancer from diet > 10% diabetes

Human evolution & Food supply: 2/2

Dietary recommendations for humans(old USA)

Dietary recommendations for humans in the ‘Mediterranean Diet’

Fats & oils(limited use)

Cakes & sweets

Meat, fish & eggs

Milk & dairy products

Vegetables (2-3 servings)

Fruits (3-5 servings)

Cereals (6-11 servings)

5-8 servings

New USA recommendations: Dynamic Pyramid (mypiramid.gov)

Activity

Moderation

Personalization

Proportionality

Variety

Gradual improving

Dietary saturated fat (SF): the public enemy?Taubes (2001)

High SF content in meat and dairy products.

Restriction based on a chain of facts on SF:

‒ Elevates blood cholesterol ‒ Cholesterol clogs arteries

(atheroesclerosis)‒ Elevates risk of hearth attack,

stroke and death. Veracity of the whole facts

chain never been proved. Evidences support that healthy

individuals only can extend their lives by few weeks by eating less fat.

Livestock greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions

■ “The Lancet” (2007) Recommended to reduce meat consumption to

90 g/person/day (32 kg/yr) as a way to reduce Global Warming:

“Less meat = less heat”

Livestock responsible of: ▬ 9% CO2 × 1▬ 35% CH4 × 21▬ 65% NO × 300

Livestock industry related to 18% of total world GHG (direct & indirect)

Carbon print of dairy cattle: 1944 vs. 2007 (Capper et al., 2007)

Methane not 21 times more potent than CO2still controversial (Flood, 2011)Statement: Livestock convert CO2 to CH4 “a gas which is 21 times more effective than CO2 as a greenhouse gas (GHG).”The confusion stems from the fact that:

1 t CH4 = 21 times more effective than 1 t CO2

But: CH4 = 16 g/mol; 1 t = 1,000/16 = 62.5 mol CO2 = 44 g/mol; 1 t = 1,000/44 = 22.7 mol Ratio CH4 to CO2 = 2.75 (Ratio N2O to CO2 = 1)

If livestock takes 1 t CO2 and converts it to CH4 they will only produce: 1,000 kg/2.75 = 363 kg CH4

GHG efficiency: 363 kg CH4 × 21 = 7,623 kg CO2

So:1 mol CH4 is only 7.6 times more effective than CO2 for GHG!!

Error?

The ecological war: “Cars vs. Cows”

Car: 150 g CO2/km

1 car = 10,000 km/yr × 150 g/km = 1.5 t CO2/yr = 20,000 km/yr × 150 g/km = 3.0 t CO2/yr

Cow: Digestion (70-120) = 100 kg CH4/yr

Manure = 16 kg CH4/yr 1.9 kg N2O/yr

GHG = 116 kg CH4 × 16/44 × 21 (7.6) = 0.89 t CO2 (0.32 t)

1.9 kg N2O × 44/44 × 300 = 0.57 t CO2

1.46 t CO2 (0.89 t)

= 116 kg CH4/yr

1 dairy cow < 1 car … but, is car recycling CO2 like cow does?

Green car: 100 g CO2/km = 1.0 - 2.0 t CO2/yr